Benchmarks

Test System

• 15-inch Macbook Air M2, 2023 (my personal laptop)
• rust-parallel uses 8 parallel jobs by default on this machine
• MacOS 13.5

Test Setup

• Run echo on 1000 strings 1 to 1000
• Benchmarks run using hyperfine testing tool
• Link to benchmark script

Summary

• rust-parallel is 1.41 times faster when the path cache is enabled (this is enabled by default)
• rust-parallel is 1.63 times faster than xargs with 8 processes. Note that this use of xargs does not prevent output interleaving.
• rust-parallel is 13.18 times faster than GNU parallel

Versions

$ rust-parallel -V
rust-parallel 1.9.1

$ parallel -V
GNU parallel 20230822

Results

$ hyperfine --warmup 3 \
  'seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel echo' \
  'seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel --disable-path-cache echo' \
  'seq 1 1000 | xargs -P8 -L1 echo' \
  'seq 1 1000 | parallel echo'

Benchmark 1: seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel echo
  Time (mean ± σ):     149.3 ms ±   0.8 ms    [User: 225.1 ms, System: 743.1 ms]
  Range (min … max):   147.6 ms … 150.2 ms    19 runs

Benchmark 2: seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel --disable-path-cache echo
  Time (mean ± σ):     210.8 ms ±   0.9 ms    [User: 254.1 ms, System: 986.5 ms]
  Range (min … max):   209.6 ms … 212.7 ms    14 runs

Benchmark 3: seq 1 1000 | xargs -P8 -L1 echo
  Time (mean ± σ):     242.9 ms ±   1.4 ms    [User: 146.0 ms, System: 544.7 ms]
  Range (min … max):   239.9 ms … 244.8 ms    12 runs

Benchmark 4: seq 1 1000 | parallel echo
  Time (mean ± σ):      1.967 s ±  0.012 s    [User: 2.428 s, System: 3.558 s]
  Range (min … max):    1.952 s …  1.983 s    10 runs

Summary
  seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel echo ran
    1.41 ± 0.01 times faster than seq 1 1000 | rust-parallel --disable-path-cache echo
    1.63 ± 0.01 times faster than seq 1 1000 | xargs -P8 -L1 echo
   13.18 ± 0.10 times faster than seq 1 1000 | parallel echo